[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-30?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12529249
]
Jochen Wiedmann commented on MIME4J-30:
---------------------------------------
Please, let's have the discussion on the Cursor interface in another issue. I
intriduced it here only to demonstrate to you, that the Cursor interface is (at
least IMO) questionable anyways.
For now, let's stick to the admission that StreamCursor is hard coded anyways
and that it's hard to refuse a patch just because it casts the cursor to
StreamCursor.
> Transfer-encoding should be transparent
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: MIME4J-30
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-30
> Project: Mime4j
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 0.3
> Reporter: Jochen Wiedmann
> Assignee: Robert Burrell Donkin
> Fix For: 0.4
>
> Attachments: mime4j-transfer-encoding.patch,
> mime4j-transfer-encoding.patch, mime4j-transfer-encoding.patch
>
>
> Currently the mime4j user must be aware of the transfer-encoding header.
> a) This is inconvenient. I can think of no reason, why a user should want the
> encoded data stream.
> b) This blocks MIME4J-27 in the following sense: If a user configures a limit
> on the attachments size,
> then this should most possibly limit the decoded attachments size. But
> Mime4j can only track
> the decoded attachments size, if it is itself responsible for decoding.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
